I don't see how who owns your reputation is in any way relevant. It's still an act of force to maliciously trash your reputation, and it's morally wrong to ask somebody to pay you not to.
You have a very limited definition of force. So if releasing information will destroy your reputation or your business, you don't consider that force? Physical force isn't the only form of force.
But if I like your art, and can get it for free, why the fuck should I pay for it? When I can let a sucker like you pay for it instead? Relying on peoples natural altruistic instinct isn't going to work in the long-run.
If society values art, then talented artists (note: not just anybody who feels like calling themselves an artist) should be able to make a decent living (i.e. not necessarily "boat-loads of cash"). So the question is, what is the best way to ensure that artists producing stuff that people enjoy are fairly compensated for their efforts?
It's supposed to be a summary not a teaser. There should be enough information in the summary that somebody can make a decision as to whether or not they should give a shit about the story. That is not the case here.
Then the gramophone came along and the bottom fell out of that market. As TFA states, very few artists make any money from touring and live performances.
Concerns about the government and its knowledge about its citizenry is often referred to in a derogatory sense as actions of "Big Brother" who is omnipresent and gathering information to use to its advantage when needed. The electronic age has given rise to what is now known as thousands of "Little Brothers," who perform Internet surveillance by collecting information to form electronic profiles about a user not through human eyes or through the lens of a camera but through data collection. This form of Internet surveillance via data collection is often referred to as "dataveillance." In a sense, thousands of "Little Brothers" or automated programs can monitor virtually every action of users over the Internet. The data about a user can be accumulated and combined with other data about the user to form electronic profiles of the users.
litter brothers was a typo in the original patent that got copied to the summary.
I'm going to wildly guess it was supposed to say little brothers, which I assume is rather than the big brother of one large organization (generally the government) monitoring people, you have lots of smaller organizations (Facebook, Google, numerous internet advertising networks) monitoring people.
Reformatting and using all of the usual software to try to remove the virus didn't help at all!
Wow! Must be one of those magic virus that hides itself somewhere in the computer that survives wiping the hard drive. Either that or you are the most incompetent tech ever. I wouldn't take a recommendation for scam PC clean-up software from the world's most incompetent computer tech.
Udacity has a physics course it's rolling out at the end of the month. Looks fairly basic, but you'll have to decide for yourself if the level is appropriate for you.
I wasn't aware I was being intolerant. Apparently stating my opinion is considered intolerant, but yours somehow isn't? Curious? Sorry you feel so victimized all the time. It must be difficult when so much of the western world follows your same fantasy.
(Sorry, my english skills are limited, so I just hope that the idea in general is understood )...
That ain't the only skills you are limited in.
There's too much nonsense to go through, but I'll just take the first one, man isn't descended from monkeys and no scientist claims they are. They share a common ancestor. What you said is equivalent to me saying you're descended from your brother and asking then why your brother still exists?
Right, because clearly the claim that it's the work of some ancient tribesmen is the more outrageous claim than the one that it's the literal word of some magical invisible sky fairy. Clearly the burden of proof lies with me.
Slashdot Mirror
Google doesn't care about it's customers. it doesn't have any
Google does to have customers. They are called "advertisers" and I'm sure if they complain about something, Google will get right on it.
I know that Google Earth, at least, takes bug reports and feature requests via a public issue tracker on code.google.com.
I pointed out that they had the name of a park just up the road to me wrong on Google Earth. It's still wrong today.
Ah! Much better now. Good luck.
Or, that he was interviewing for completely different positions.
Hope they are better at making films than they are at selecting backgrounds for their blog. It's unreadable!
I don't see how who owns your reputation is in any way relevant. It's still an act of force to maliciously trash your reputation, and it's morally wrong to ask somebody to pay you not to.
You have a very limited definition of force. So if releasing information will destroy your reputation or your business, you don't consider that force? Physical force isn't the only form of force.
But if I like your art, and can get it for free, why the fuck should I pay for it? When I can let a sucker like you pay for it instead? Relying on peoples natural altruistic instinct isn't going to work in the long-run.
If society values art, then talented artists (note: not just anybody who feels like calling themselves an artist) should be able to make a decent living (i.e. not necessarily "boat-loads of cash"). So the question is, what is the best way to ensure that artists producing stuff that people enjoy are fairly compensated for their efforts?
It's supposed to be a summary not a teaser. There should be enough information in the summary that somebody can make a decision as to whether or not they should give a shit about the story. That is not the case here.
That's nice. So your argument is that society shouldn't value artists and artists should just get a day job and STFU?
Then the gramophone came along and the bottom fell out of that market. As TFA states, very few artists make any money from touring and live performances.
Agreed. I had the same reaction. Had to wade through the articles to figure out who was arguing what.
From the patent:
litter brothers was a typo in the original patent that got copied to the summary.
Litter Brothers I have no idea about.
I'm going to wildly guess it was supposed to say little brothers, which I assume is rather than the big brother of one large organization (generally the government) monitoring people, you have lots of smaller organizations (Facebook, Google, numerous internet advertising networks) monitoring people.
The Wikipedia article on Psion does mention Horace (at least on the Sinclair Spectrum). Perhaps Psion just did the Spectrum port?
Fuck Flight Simulator. This is the same company that made the Horace games!
...Is, does Motorola now hold the rights to the Horace games?
I wanna see a gritty 3D reboot of that series! Horace goes skiing as an FPS? A Horace MMORPG?
According to Ars, they've renamed the original table "PixelSense".
Reformatting and using all of the usual software to try to remove the virus didn't help at all!
Wow! Must be one of those magic virus that hides itself somewhere in the computer that survives wiping the hard drive. Either that or you are the most incompetent tech ever. I wouldn't take a recommendation for scam PC clean-up software from the world's most incompetent computer tech.
Udacity has a physics course it's rolling out at the end of the month. Looks fairly basic, but you'll have to decide for yourself if the level is appropriate for you.
I wasn't aware I was being intolerant. Apparently stating my opinion is considered intolerant, but yours somehow isn't? Curious? Sorry you feel so victimized all the time. It must be difficult when so much of the western world follows your same fantasy.
Seriously? Use whatever browser works for you. Who gives a shit about this stupid pissing contest.
(Sorry, my english skills are limited, so I just hope that the idea in general is understood ) ...
That ain't the only skills you are limited in.
There's too much nonsense to go through, but I'll just take the first one, man isn't descended from monkeys and no scientist claims they are. They share a common ancestor. What you said is equivalent to me saying you're descended from your brother and asking then why your brother still exists?
Right, because clearly the claim that it's the work of some ancient tribesmen is the more outrageous claim than the one that it's the literal word of some magical invisible sky fairy. Clearly the burden of proof lies with me.